Git bayesect
Bisection tool in Developer tools
Bayesian git bisect for flaky bugs that finds the bad commit using repeated test runs and a chosen confidence level.
Bayesian git bisect for flaky bugs that finds the bad commit using repeated test runs and a chosen confidence level.
13 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 12
- criticize it
- 1
- approval share
- 92%
Recommended in 2 of 13 months
- November 2025: not recommended
- December 2025: not recommended
- January 2026: not recommended
- February 2026: not recommended
- March 2026: recommended
- April 2026: recommended
- May 2026: not recommended
- June 2026: not recommended
- July 2026: not recommended
- August 2026: not recommended
- September 2026: not recommended
- October 2026: not recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it doesn’t carry the badge
- 12 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, met.
- 12 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, met.
- Recommended in 2 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, not met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Handles flaky bugs better than repeats
“if you're waiting 15 minutes to compile LLVM you're probably going to want to run your 1 second flaky test more than once”
Comment from 1 Apr 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” “This is one of the advantages over just doing git bisect with some finger-in-air test repeat factor.”
Comment from 2 Apr 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” “Useful for tests with LLM interactions.”
Comment from 1 Apr 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” Clean, well-formalized Bayesian math
“I really like how in bayesect making the error rates asymmetric via independent Beta priors on bidirectional errors allows the computations to be nice and symmetric.”
Comment from 2 Apr 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” “this is really fun and mathematically satisfying”
Comment from 28 Mar 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” “Great to see the math formalized like this.”
Comment from 2 Apr 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” Fun and satisfying to use
“this is really fun and mathematically satisfying”
Comment from 28 Mar 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” “Yay, I had fun with it too!”
Comment from 28 Mar 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” Benchmarked better than plain bisect
“We ran benchmarks comparing bisect vs bayesect across flakiness levels.”
Comment from 1 Apr 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs” “that's still better than poking at the repo blind”
Comment from 2 Apr 2026 in “Show HN: Git bayesect – Bayesian Git bisection for non-deterministic bugs”
What people said
13 of the 14 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“I really like how in bayesect making the error rates asymmetric via independent Beta priors on bidirectional errors allows the computations to be nice and symmetric.”
“you applied Bayesian methods to a problem I never would have thought to use it on!”
“that's still better than poking at the repo blind”
“isn't optimal even in the no overhead regime”
“you can run bayesect to an arbitrary confidence level”
“Great to see the math formalized like this.”
“This is one of the advantages over just doing git bisect with some finger-in-air test repeat factor.”
“if you're waiting 15 minutes to compile LLVM you're probably going to want to run your 1 second flaky test more than once”
“We ran benchmarks comparing bisect vs bayesect across flakiness levels.”
“It seems to be usable, or at least as usable as a Show HN thingy is expected to be.”
“Useful for tests with LLM interactions.”
“Yay, I had fun with it too!”
“this is really fun and mathematically satisfying”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.